Inhabiting Other Planets

[redcannon]

The more we find out about our solar system, the more it seems that extra-terrestrial life may exist. However, if it does, it is almost certainly in the form of Prokaryotic bacteria and Viruses, but perhaps some Eukaryotic life.

Here lies the debate. Way back in the day when our DNA was still in its early stages of evolution (a good 2 billion years ago), it was developing in a world where there was no other hint of life at all. It is theorized that if even a fragment of extra-terrestrial life was put on earth during that time or at almost any time during that primordial stage, life as we know it may not exist.

Simply put: If ET came to earth 2 billion years ago and exhaled his alien breath on some of our single-celled ancestors, it would have killed them all, resulting is us not being here.

So suppose we land on Europa or Mars or other places in our solar system where there might be life, should we go on to inhabit it? If we find little microbes on Mars and decide to terraform the planet (a far off dream, I know, but for the sake of example) it would replace the Martian life with our life. We would be destroying what could be the next great species of our solar system.

But then again, it is also likely that they could be killed off in various other ways, and we would be thwarting human progress by not inhabiting said planet, or moon, or whatever.

So what do you think? If all goes to plan, we will know if there is life on Europa by 2019. What will happen if there is? Europa would be a great place to refuel spacecraft on intra-solar system flights, but it would probably kill the Europan fauna.
Pros and Cons

NOTE: there is a reason why this isn't in ChitChat. This topic is of much debate in the scientific community, at least according to the late Carl Sagan.

[kelly-087]

There isnt really any good hope for Mars as liquid water either doesnt exist or is scare. Any complex multi-cellular life that could of existed on Mars existed millions of years ago anyways we should inhabit those planets if we have the ability.

But if there is complex life on them. (lets say one day we reach Gliese 581c and there is a diverse ecosystem on it) we shouldent do anything to harm or even destroy it.

[redcannon]

Originally posted by kelly-[email protected] 08, 2007 11:29 pm

But if there is complex life on them. (lets say one day we reach Gliese 581c and there is a diverse ecosystem on it) we shouldent do anything to harm or even destroy it.
but even if there are merely amino acids on said environment, should we be able to infringe upon it?

[bcbm]

Originally posted by kelly-[email protected] 09, 2007 12:29 am
There isnt really any good hope for Mars as liquid water either doesnt exist or is scare.
As I understand the latest theories on this subject, this isn't an absolute requirement for the existence of life. Other life may not resemble us at all, and could be based on other molecules/atoms.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Since Microbes can't even feel pain, I do not see what the problem is. Although it would behoove us to preserve some samples before we risk unintentionally wiping them out.

As for more complex forms of life, it is pretty much dependant on context. Such as how badly do the prospective colonists need to settle, wheather native lifeforms pose a significant threat or not, etc etc.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I don't really think it matters whether they feel pain, humans as a society have never protected the "rights" of microscopic organisms and I don't think it'll start now.

I vote yes. If only to piss off the Christians who complain about people wanting to "play God". =D

[Sentinel]

Simply put: If ET came to earth 2 billion years ago and exhaled his alien breath on some of our single-celled ancestors, it would have killed them all, resulting is us not being here.

Yeah, and every time a guy masturbates he kills off a potential generation of human beings on Earth. Clearly we have enough to worry about as it is, without taking into account life that could be.


So what do you think? If all goes to plan, we will know if there is life on Europa by 2019. What will happen if there is? Europa would be a great place to refuel spacecraft on intra-solar system flights, but it would probably kill the Europan fauna.

Everything must be weighed carefully, of course, but I'm quite afraid that would be extremely 'tough shit' for the Europan fauna then. Unless we find out that it could be useful to us as a species, in one way or another, I see no reason to let it hinder human expansion and progress.

Hell, such microbes could be dangerous, even lethal for us -- perhaps they'll have to be destroyed purposely. But we really can't know before we find and examine them, so this is mere speculation.

[Black Cross]

Yeah, and every time a guy masturbates he kills off a potential generation of human beings on Earth. Clearly we have enough to worry about as it is, without taking into account life that could be.

Are you serious? About the masturbation thing, i mean.

I don't think it's that big of a problem if we kill them off. We would just be doing them a favor, saving them from a wretched existence wherein capitalists who would just enslave them, haha.

[which doctor]

I don't see a problem with it at all. In fact, I think we should ship all of our trash and waste to some shitty frozen rock wasteland of a planet so we can better preserve the one we currently live on.

[Sentinel]

Originally posted by Marxist-rev+July 09, 2007 05:50 pm--> (Marxist-rev @ July 09, 2007 05:50 pm)
Yeah, and every time a guy masturbates he kills off a potential generation of human beings on Earth. Clearly we have enough to worry about as it is, without taking into account life that could be.

Are you serious? About the masturbation thing, i mean.

[/b]
Well, it's quite close anyway. The current global population, consisting of several generations, is about 12 wanks:


Wikipedia
Approximately 200- to 500-million spermatozoa (also called sperm or spermatozoans), produced in the testes, are released per ejaculation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semen

[Political_Chucky]

Wouldn't the pressure on different planets eventually kill you or kill you on the spot? I think I heard something about that or maybe its cause i'm high

[bezdomni]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 06:45 pm
Wouldn't the pressure on different planets eventually kill you or kill you on the spot? I think I heard something about that or maybe its cause i'm high
No, but moving human life off of Earth would definitely change the evolutionary process.

Not a good thing or a bad thing - just a truth.

[The Author]

Originally posted by [email protected] July 8, 2007, 04:52 am
So suppose we land on Europa or Mars or other places in our solar system where there might be life, should we go on to inhabit it? If we find little microbes on Mars and decide to terraform the planet (a far off dream, I know, but for the sake of example) it would replace the Martian life with our life. We would be destroying what could be the next great species of our solar system.

You mean, like, violating the "Prime Directive"?

[Coprolal1an]

Originally posted by CriticizeEverythingAlways+July 10, 2007 02:17 am--> (CriticizeEverythingAlways @ July 10, 2007 02:17 am)
[email protected] July 8, 2007, 04:52 am
So suppose we land on Europa or Mars or other places in our solar system where there might be life, should we go on to inhabit it? If we find little microbes on Mars and decide to terraform the planet (a far off dream, I know, but for the sake of example) it would replace the Martian life with our life. We would be destroying what could be the next great species of our solar system.

You mean, like, violating the "Prime Directive"? [/b]
That's the first thing that came to my mind too xD

But yes, we SHOULD do it if it is in the interest of humanity, and if we do not harm *sentient* life. It's absolutely ridiculous to not inhabit a planet because there is a remote possibility that two-billion years later some bacteria might evolve into some sort of intelligent life. I mean, you could say the same about bacteria here and yet we kill millions by using disinfectant! In short, sacrificing advancement because of what could be is bad, but when the 'could be' is millions or billions of years in the future, it's just plain idiotic.

[RevSouth]

I would say humans will have to, especially for long term survival. Something is bound to happen that will doom life on Earth at some point, or at least make it a lot tougher.

Has anyone heard of the theory of exogenesis, though? It is the theory that life didn't originate on earth, but arrived on a comet or asteroid, something of that nature, in the form of a tough little bacteria. Panspermia is basically the same theory, except that life is widespread through this happening.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia

[ComradeR]

I say as long as there is no sentient life on a planet then we should do what we see fit with it.

[apathy maybe]

I agree with the basic consensus here.

If it is simply bacteria (or similar), then while we should try and preserve some samples, we should not worry about wiping it out.

Larger life forms, well, it depends on the context. In cases where there exist complex eco-systems, then well I don't think we should wipe it out. Of course, that is a purely subjective opinion based on my raising complex eco-systems to a high level of "desirability".

Oh, and I voted no just to piss of the technocrats :P :ph34r: :cool:

[Johann]

I think it could be interesting in a few places to study life as it evolves. But the problem is that you cannot say for certain that these microbes are going to result in intelligent or sentient life, since evolution is not an inevitable march towards greater and greater complexity.

[apathy maybe]

But who cares if you cannot say that they won't result in intelligent or sentient life? They aren't intelligent or sentient, and the time it would take for evolution to potentially produce sentient beings from them is longer then we have to wait around.

Frankly, I don't care about bacteria (or life of a similar complexity) if that is all an eco-system is made up of.

[Johann]

You misunderstand me
What i meant was that if you decided to study the life evolving on a planet somewhere you could end up wasting your time because your not always going to end up with anything that is sentient/whatever.

I basically agree with you. Since they aren't sentient or intelligent now and there is no guarantee that they will be in the future there is no reason to put them above us.

[Avtomat_Icaro]

I can understand both sides of the conflict, however I think we should go for the middle way, dont exterminate them. Perhaps see if there are possibilities to live side by side or something if they arent dangerous to us?

[Freigemachten]

I am firmly of the opinion that we should not export our fuckups to other planets. By colonizing another planet before we clear up all the shit that is wrong with this one, we are dooming it to destruction in any case, be it by disrupting its natural evolutionary path, or poisoning and lighting it on fire like we have Earth.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 07:21 am
I am firmly of the opinion that we should not export our fuckups to other planets.
To put it another way you have decided, through (presumably) some emotionally guided moralism that we "deserve" to suffer the consequences of our fuckups, and those of our ancestors rather than to start afresh elsewhere?


By colonizing another planet before we clear up all the shit that is wrong with this one, we are dooming it to destruction in any case,

Um, what? Simply because we don't know how to reverse some of the damage done to this planet does not mean we cannot prevent the same set of circumstances.


be it by disrupting its natural evolutionary path,

What does the evolutionary path of another planet matter to us, we should be free to disrupt, halt or change it as we see fit.


or poisoning and lighting it on fire like we have Earth.

You can't poison something that's not, strictly speaking, alive. Also we haven't, in any literal sense set the world on fire - that would take a metric shitload of heat - although I suspect you're being hyperbolic.

[Freigemachten]

Originally posted by Jazzratt+September 02, 2007 12:44 pm--> (Jazzratt @ September 02, 2007 12:44 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2007 07:21 am
I am firmly of the opinion that we should not export our fuckups to other planets.
To put it another way you have decided, through (presumably) some emotionally guided moralism that we "deserve" to suffer the consequences of our fuckups, and those of our ancestors rather than to start afresh elsewhere?


By colonizing another planet before we clear up all the shit that is wrong with this one, we are dooming it to destruction in any case,

Um, what? Simply because we don't know how to reverse some of the damage done to this planet does not mean we cannot prevent the same set of circumstances.


be it by disrupting its natural evolutionary path,

What does the evolutionary path of another planet matter to us, we should be free to disrupt, halt or change it as we see fit.


or poisoning and lighting it on fire like we have Earth.

You can't poison something that's not, strictly speaking, alive. Also we haven't, in any literal sense set the world on fire - that would take a metric shitload of heat - although I suspect you're being hyperbolic. [/b]
I apologize for that post not making complete sense, I'm actually not firmly of that belief, I just wanted to sound important. Not really.

I don't know that we exactly deserve our fuckups, though I would think it a good idea to figure out how to and actually go through with avoiding repeating said fuckups somewhere else. At the rate things are going though, I suspect we'll recreate our circumstance anywhere we go.

I suspect the natural evolution of another planet isnt really of much concern.

We are however currently in the process of poisoning the atmosphere, much of the worlds fresh water supply has also been poisoned. And yes, I was being a bit hyperbolic.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 12:50 pm
I apologize for that post not making complete sense, I'm actually not firmly of that belief, I just wanted to sound important. Not really.
Right enough.


I don't know that we exactly deserve our fuckups, though I would think it a good idea to figure out how to and actually go through with avoiding repeating said fuckups somewhere else.

I don't see a problem with this.


At the rate things are going though, I suspect we'll recreate our circumstance anywhere we go.

Maybe on the first planet we get to, hell maybe even on a few subsequent ones - but there are literally billions of the fuckers in this galaxy alone - in the grand scheme of things fucking up one or two of them is irrelevant


I suspect the natural evolution of another planet isnt really of much concern.

Aye.


We are however currently in the process of poisoning the atmosphere, much of the worlds fresh water supply has also been poisoned.

This claim needs MOAR SAUCE PLZ!


And yes, I was being a bit hyperbolic.

We all do it sometimes.

[Freigemachten]

Destroying worlds is completely relevent. yes, there are effectively an infinite number of planets, but there are only so many people and so much time. Technology only allows for so much, how far can we reach before we overstep what we can manage and die out?

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 01:05 pm
Destroying worlds is completely relevent.
It's a nuisance.


yes, there are effectively an infinite number of planets, but there are only so many people and so much time. Technology only allows for so much, how far can we reach before we overstep what we can manage and die out?

What mystical bullshit is this? If we have the technology to move from one star to another (presumably using sleeper ships) then we have, effectively infinite grasp.

[apathy maybe]

More to the point, does it matter if humans die out? Is it going to be of cosmical significance if all the humans are dead?

I wouldn't care really much if humans are still on Earth (and no where else, or just in the Solar System) when the Sun goes nova.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 04, 2007 01:12 pm
More to the point, does it matter if humans die out?
Sort of. It will matter to the humans that they are dying out and it will matter t the last human that the rest of the species is gone.


Is it going to be of cosmical significance if all the humans are dead?

Nope.


I wouldn't care really much if humans are still on Earth (and no where else, or just in the Solar System) when the Sun goes nova.

Only because you wouldn't be there.

I would much rather we were gone by then.